Comparison of Five Design Variables of Response Surface Designs in a Spherical Region Over a Set of Reduced Models
Keywords:
response surface design, design optimality criteria, spherical design region, reduced models, weak heredityAbstract
The research extended the work of Chomtee and Borkowski (2012) which compared response surface designs—central composite designs (CCDs), Box-Behnken designs (BBDs), small composite designs (SCDs), Plackett-Burman composite designs (PBDs) and uniform shell designs (USDs)—over a set of reduced models in a spherical design region for five design variables (k = 5) based on the three alphabetic optimality criteria—D and G where larger values imply a better design (on a per point basis) and IV (where a smaller value implies a better design). The results present a comparison of the design optimality criteria of the response surface designs across the full second order model and a set of reduced models (839 models) for five factors based on the three alphabetic optimality criteria. The results of the comparison ranking of the D, G and IV criteria of reduced models showed that for small design sizes, N = 23, 25, 27 and 29, based on D and G, the SCD (n0 = 1, 3) are recommended over the PBD (n0 = 1, 3). For medium design sizes, N = 31, 33 and 35, based on D and G, the USD (n0 = 1, 3) are recommended over the PBD (rs = 2, n0 = 1, 3), and when N = 35, 37, the SCD (rs = 2, n0 = 1) is recommended over the PBD (rs = 2, n0 = 3). For a large design size, N = 43, based on D, the CCD (n0 = 1) is recommended over the BBD (n0 = 3), and based on G and IV, the BBD (n0 = 3) is recommended over the CCD (n0 = 1).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
online 2452-316X print 2468-1458/Copyright © 2022. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/),
production and hosting by Kasetsart University of Research and Development Institute on behalf of Kasetsart University.